Jump to content

What every one wants?


meplanes1969
 Share

Recommended Posts

Manstein16

I want whatever the dev team gives us. Not trying to sound sycophantic, but I still marvel at the sheer number of planes and their variants that are realistically modeled in IL2 GB. If the dev team can replicate it, I will happily (try to) fly it.

 

16 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

 

Who and where did i say ground sorties, i would use it for air to air of course... just like the 110.

I mean, you did go all Ace in a Flight with the Duck, fer cryin’ out loud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Manstein16 said:

I want whatever the dev team gives us. Not trying to sound sycophantic, but I still marvel at the sheer number of planes and their variants that are realistically modeled in IL2 GB. If the dev team can replicate it, I will happily (try to) fly it.

 

I mean, you did go all Ace in a Flight with the Duck, fer cryin’ out loud.

But you're missing the point of this (and many other) thread(s). It isn't about being grateful. We are. It isn't about being thoughtful. We try. And it isn't about being realistic. We should, if we could, but rarely are we able to. It's about tossing out baseless theories, impossible wants and questionable ideas. That, my good man, is the essence of being a Great Battles IL-2 simster.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlitzPig_EL

Looks like a tadpole with wings.  Nothing pretty about it.

14 hours ago, JG4_Moltke1871 said:

I want this beauty 

 

image.jpeg.1e9d0a98c1265f63ced68483be3c0c23.jpeg

Looks like a tadpole with wings.

 

bleah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2021 at 6:13 AM, JG5_Schuck said:

Maybe an SB2 or DB3/IL4.... Do17/217 would be nice aswell.

something that has been bafflingly absent. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ZachariasX
22 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Looks like a tadpole with wings.

You think it will turn into a Ju-488?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feathered_IV

The brain is a very weird thing.  I actually dreamt last night that the new aircraft Jason was working on was the Tupolev SB. In three versions no less. 
How my subconscious managed to throw that one out there I do not know.  I rarely ever spare a thought for that machine.  
 

54E557FC-49C2-4555-B7E3-689A5A4B6DCE.jpeg.693270fd0d5d29572394e79c0e35bd88.jpeg

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlitzPig_EL

I have your next plane right here...

 

spacer.png

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
5 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

I have your next plane right here...

 

spacer.png

 

That´s a very good one. Could be used in BoM, BoS and BoN and 1C should have zero problems to model it. Here:

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CUJO_1970
29 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

I have your next plane right here...

 

spacer.png

 

B-239 confirmed!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MajorMagee
3 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

The brain is a very weird thing.  I actually dreamt last night that the new aircraft Jason was working on was the Tupolev SB. In three versions no less. 
How my subconscious managed to throw that one out there I do not know.  I rarely ever spare a thought for that machine.  
 

54E557FC-49C2-4555-B7E3-689A5A4B6DCE.jpeg.693270fd0d5d29572394e79c0e35bd88.jpeg

You made me remember flying this one...

Shot09-10-15-21-49-39.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yakdriver

A Fiat G55 (Series 0),
maxresdefault.jpg


and some of the Hot Rods that Pappy Gunn inspired to be built. Havoc or Mitchell, bring' em all.
Filled to the brim with the most outrageous and outlandish ordinance.
22_Squadron_RAAF_Boston_and_armourers_Ne

colonel-paul-irvin-pappy-gunn-october-18

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-=PHX=-SuperEtendard
On 10/23/2021 at 11:18 AM, sevenless said:

 

True, but the 9 and 9T don´t have the 2nd UBS of the 7B.


Afaik with the bubble canopy one of the Berezins was removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
56 minutes ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:


Afaik with the bubble canopy one of the Berezins was removed.

 

Nope, the 7Bs with bubble canopy all had 2 UBS. The reason for removal of the right hand side UBS in the 9 series was unrelated to the canopy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

The brain is a very weird thing.  I actually dreamt last night that the new aircraft Jason was working on was the Tupolev SB. In three versions no less. 
How my subconscious managed to throw that one out there I do not know.  I rarely ever spare a thought for that machine.  
 

54E557FC-49C2-4555-B7E3-689A5A4B6DCE.jpeg.693270fd0d5d29572394e79c0e35bd88.jpeg

I thought it was lucid dreaming, not ludicrous dreaming?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-=PHX=-SuperEtendard
33 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

Nope, the 7Bs with bubble canopy all had 2 UBS. The reason for removal of the right hand side UBS in the 9 series was unrelated to the canopy.


But what about this one?

Pict03.jpg

Looks like a Yak-7 given it doesn't seem to have the Yak-9 squareish wingtip.

Do you have photos of bubble Yak-7B with both machine guns visible? I tried to look for some but most of them are taken from the left side, only showing the Berezin mount they would have anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2021 at 10:58 PM, PatrickAWlson said:

 

I looks oddly French

 

It don't think so, It lived in france for almost 20 years and It's seen some odd looking people, but nobody that looked remotely like either of those in your avatar...assuming that's you? :biggrin:

 

===============

 

Ok, joking on the back of typo's aside, I don't really see any strong resemblance between the Yak-7A and any French aircraft of the time, other than the engine exhaust port pattern. This is no surprise as the Klimov M-105 engine used in the Yak's, LaGG's & Pe-2's was a development of the licenced built Hispano-Suiza 12Y French engine used in M.S.406 /410 & D.520 fighters.

 

That o  oo oo  o exhaust port spacing is markedly different from other V-12 engines, o o o o o o of the time and therefore stands out, in the same way that the   o  oo  o exhaust port spacing a small block Chevy or Mopar, tells anyone who knows that it's not a Ford which is o o o o as any average "gear head" will tell you.

 

Other than that I just don't see it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feathered_IV
17 minutes ago, Pict said:

I don't really see any strong resemblance between the Yak-7A and any French aircraft of the time


It looks more like a 1960’s British caravan to me. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
2 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:


But what about this one?

Pict03.jpg

Looks like a Yak-7 given it doesn't seem to have the Yak-9 squareish wingtip.

Do you have photos of bubble Yak-7B with both machine guns visible? I tried to look for some but most of them are taken from the left side, only showing the Berezin mount they would have anyways.

 

Are you sure about that being a 7B ? For me generally speaking, wouldn´t there be the difference in guns, I think it would be near impossible to discriminate a late 7B from an early 9. The development process from 7B to 7DI to 9 is a little "complicated" and less than transparently documented to put it mildly.

 

Unbenannt.jpg.afaa4bfc9fba9fd270c9ff51cc03154d.jpg

 

Nope unfortunately no pictures. I have to go with descriptions in books. Online you find something interesting here, which doesn´t make things easier:

 

Yak-7B fighter with M-105PF engine, A.S.Yakovlev (ram-home.com)

 

Quote

In December 1942 at the 45thIAP (F.I.Shinkarenko, North-West Front) Yak-7B M-105PF were modified same way as the Yak-1 was: upper fuselage cut down behind the cockpit and new tear-shaped canopy fitted. Improved pilot's view resulted in win/loss ratio gain.

 

So it appears not only did they produce cut down fuselages at the factories but also carried this out by field mod? Or was it the other way round? And cut down fuselage was only done by field mod?

 

Edit 1: Found your pic above in a squadrons publication. According to that, it is a 7DI. Please note the text of the capture:

 

image.thumb.png.f54fcd1e00c04ddfcd8b68c4829286cf.png

 

Edit 2: Also from that squadrons publication:

 

image.png.f92bf9cb767c6ede818be886b9d85135.png

Edited by sevenless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sevenless said:

Nope unfortunately no pictures. I have to go with descriptions in books.

 

Here's what's on offer from Eric Pilawskii's book with regards to the Yak-7B, I highlighted all the info pertaining to the cut down version and at no point does it mention the removal of any weapons. This is also reflected in the profile artwork in the book. All other types mentioned throughout the book including Yak-7 variants where armament was changed or reduced for any reason is always noted clearly.

 

1492096922_Yak-7Bcutdown01.thumb.jpg.1130c436968a3101b1d1721998bb608a.jpg

 

There was also a Razvedchik (scout) reconaissance variant made in signifcant number and even had a field mod kit available to units at the front. It only had a single 20 mm canon firing through the spinner, so it's possible that the Yak-7 in question showing no machinegun armament was this Razvedchik (scout) reconaissance variant.

 

1361457989_Yak-7Bcutdown02.thumb.jpg.6f83a37adfbc7cc37e8c17a592b7b364.jpg

Edited by Pict
2 ii's in Pilawskii
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What everyone wants (me included): B25

North_American_Aviations_B-25_medium_bomber_Inglewood_Calif.thumb.jpg.399b80de287b50a96d10cd99176c601d.jpg

 

 

What 15 frequent forum posters and ww2 obsessive enthusiasts want;

Ushakov flying submarine

20210802_160002.jpg.d5778aa49bc6f51eebde56323c0a7625.jpg

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

meplanes1969

Lots of planes I want,but I still want the zero the most,followed second by a Fiesler storch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I want dedicated recon aircraft and recon missions. I also would like a Battle of France or a Pacific Theater DLC. OH and more Italian planes, please!

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GoNuts4Donuts

I want to know exactly what Hellcats this fairytale Zero chases around that OP mentions. More like Hellcats lighting up the Zero like a paper lantern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I./JG52_Woutwocampe

A late eastern war setup with the Yak 3, the La 7, the IL-10, the TU-2, Do217, He162, FW190 A9, BF109 G10, and P-63 + Ta152 as collector planes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, GoNuts4Donuts said:

I want to know exactly what Hellcats this fairytale Zero chases around that OP mentions. More like Hellcats lighting up the Zero like a paper lantern.

 

Except it often doesn’t shake out that way.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feathered_IV
5 hours ago, GoNuts4Donuts said:

I want to know exactly what Hellcats this fairytale Zero chases around that OP mentions. More like Hellcats lighting up the Zero like a paper lantern.

 

Zero model 21 from 1942-43.  It will meet every contemporary opponent and give it a run for it’s money every single time. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IckyATLAS

I cannot imagine a BoN without a B17 Bomber. And even if it is not flyable it should be there. The B25 we have should be flyable.

Afficher l’image source

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sevenless
17 minutes ago, IckyATLAS said:

I cannot imagine a BoN without a B17 Bomber. And even if it is not flyable it should be there. The B25 we have should be flyable.

 

Agreed. There should at least be AI B17 functionality on the level of the good old IL-2 1946 present. Who knows, maybe we´ll see it one day?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I./JG52_Woutwocampe

Guys, the game slows down when there are like 14 fighters and a formation of 6 He111.

 

Imagine 24 Mustangs escorting only 16 B-17 and 8x 190s intercepting. And thats nothing compared to reality.

 

And no, it is certainely not due to my computer.

 

As soon as the game has to manage a certain amount of AI objects it starts to slow down. The framerate doesnt drop but the game itself runs at like 75% of its normal speed. We unfortunately need to forget heavy bombers like the B-17 and B-24.

Edited by I./JG52_Woutwocampe
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2021 at 5:05 AM, Feathered_IV said:

 

Zero model 21 from 1942-43.  It will meet every contemporary opponent and give it a run for it’s money every single time. 

Hellcat kill ratio: 19:1.

Zero kill ratio: 12:1.

Both kill ratios are highly respectable, but the only aspects that the zero outperforms mid-late war American carrier aircraft are agility and MAYBE climb rate. I'd rather go up against a Zero in a Hellcat, preferably a Corsair. 

I would also like to add that I would LOVE to see an I-153 or I-15. Also, I'd like to see the droptanks implemented so I can fly longer PWCG missions. .. I'll probably think of more.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duce_de_Zoop

Something I've been disappointed in during my Il-2 pilot careers is the lack of, well, appropriate targets. Il-2s were best utilized against soft targets, particularly infantry. Their rockets and relatively inaccurate bombs perform poorly against tanks, and there's only so much artillery and trucks you can strafe without it feeling routine. 

 

Now, obviously modeling infantry is out both because of LOD issues and the sheer processing power itd take. However...

 

What if, like the MG positions we currently have, the game could spawn 'encampments' and 'trenches' as individual units? The same way we have artillery in the rear, perhaps we could have a number of 'tent' and 'trench' units, which are modeled as maybe a small number of tents/wooden bunkers built around a fire. To add to the immersion, maybe we could get some infantry modeled in a prone position to make it look like they're hiding from the strafing runs. Or they could run off the way crews of AAAs and artillery do, though I'm not sure the impact that would have on performance. I feel the former option would be operate well enough. Something to avoid the infantry models standing defiantly like there isn't a war going on. 

 

These could serve as nice, stationary targets for pilots of more lightly armed planes, like U-2s and Il-2s and Ju-87s, to do gun runs and bombing runs on. Sorta the way PWCG made every building a killable 'unit', this could be a processor-friendly way of populating the battlefield with more interesting targets without sacrificing performance or simplicity. They could also serve to augment already existing artillery or airfield positions and add more diverse targets and a more immersive flight. 

 

And for more 'frontline' units, perhaps a small trench/dugout with a number of infantry models within it? Maybe centralized around a single MG that acts as the 'firepower' for the collective group. That way you're only modeling one AI unit, but making it look like a whole infantry squad. The 'destroyed' texture could simply be those same infantry dead on the ground. We have an MG unit that's similar to this, but in my opinion it looks kinda goofy from the air and could use a visual update. If you've ever flown on Stalingrad and had to attack MGs out on the plains, you'll know exactly what I mean. 

 

Perhaps the devs aren't interested in this, it's a bit of work for a very niche playerbase (me, mostly), but could it be modded? 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AEthelraedUnraed
1 hour ago, Duce_de_Zoop said:

What if, like the MG positions we currently have, the game could spawn 'encampments' and 'trenches' as individual units? The same way we have artillery in the rear, perhaps we could have a number of 'tent' and 'trench' units, which are modeled as maybe a small number of tents/wooden bunkers built around a fire. To add to the immersion, maybe we could get some infantry modeled in a prone position to make it look like they're hiding from the strafing runs. Or they could run off the way crews of AAAs and artillery do, though I'm not sure the impact that would have on performance. I feel the former option would be operate well enough. Something to avoid the infantry models standing defiantly like there isn't a war going on.

I like your idea of static infantry. Similarly, I think a "vehicle" consisting of a number of soldiers who are in a fixed position relative to each other could be an easy way to  create moving infantry without too much of a CPU hit.

1 hour ago, Duce_de_Zoop said:

Perhaps the devs aren't interested in this, it's a bit of work for a very niche playerbase (me, mostly), but could it be modded? 

In fact, I've already modded moving infantry:

For static infantry, or my "invisible vehicle," you'd need to do some 3d modeling. And regrettably, the Devs haven't released their 3d modeling tools to the public :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2021 at 12:12 PM, I./JG52_Woutwocampe said:

We unfortunately need to forget heavy bombers like the B-17 and B-24.

Agreed, the TB-3 and Lancaster should be first.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

I like your idea of static infantry. Similarly, I think a "vehicle" consisting of a number of soldiers who are in a fixed position relative to each other could be an easy way to  create moving infantry without too much of a CPU hit.

In fact, I've already modded moving infantry:

For static infantry, or my "invisible vehicle," you'd need to do some 3d modeling. And regrettably, the Devs haven't released their 3d modeling tools to the public :(

 

Aye, but it's not modeling tools so to speak, but an SDK.

The modeling tools are standard stuff that I (and it sounds like you) have the ability to use.

It's the SDK to get them into the sim that we're missing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AEthelraedUnraed
45 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

Aye, but it's not modeling tools so to speak, but an SDK.

The modeling tools are standard stuff that I (and it sounds like you) have the ability to use.

It's the SDK to get them into the sim that we're missing.

True, I misphrased a bit. Even something simple as a dae->mgm converter would go a long way. Perhaps not towards creating full-fledged vehicles, but some static objects would be doable.

 

In fact, an mgm exporter was released for RoF, but it's based on a severely outdated version of 3dsmax and I never could get the exports to work in IL2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Motherbrain

I want anything NOT set in Europe between 1938 and 1945. 😄

 

Edited by Motherbrain
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Motherbrain said:

I want anything NOT set in Europe between 1938 and 1945. 😄

 

 

Aye, there's only one thing I don't want...and that's Battle of Not the PTO.

Other than that, I'm flexible.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FlyingNutcase
On 11/5/2021 at 11:06 PM, IckyATLAS said:

I cannot imagine a BoN without a B17 Bomber. And even if it is not flyable it should be there. The B25 we have should be flyable.

Afficher l’image source

 

Yes, yes, a million times yes. AI-only totally fine; B-17's would make the 262 much more useful  and that would be enough in itself but would open the doors for oh, Ta-152 Me-163, He-162, Do-335 and...the Lerche. Kidding. But there's clearly enough content for a strategic bombing module like Battle of the Ruhr or a B-24 based module with Italy/Romania.  A dream that I suspect won't get fulfilled but we're not in this thread to necessarily be realistic are we. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, FlyingNutcase said:

the Lerche

 

This should have top priority over everything else. 🤪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...